Sen. Clinton Reinforces Ties to Moderates

[sabra]

<<SNIP>>
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-5165152,00.html

Sen. Clinton Reinforces Ties to Moderates

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) - New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is cementing her ties to moderate voters, reaching out to centrists that some of her backers argue Clinton never really abandoned.

Clinton scheduled a high-profile speech Monday to the Democratic Leadership Council, a centrist group that helped pave Bill Clinton's path to the White House. The hundreds of activists gathered for the group's annual meeting made her appearance its centerpiece.

``She has `it','' said Ray Buckley, vice chairman of the New Hampshire Democratic Party. ``Some people don't; some people do.''

Activists gathered for the meeting were talking tough on fighting terrorism, calling for a larger Army and new protections for children through a uniform media rating system.

<</SNIP>>

[madfloridian]

1. From is calling for 100,000 more troops.

He says we need them to fight "terror". I guess he does not think we are scared enough now.

[Larkspur]

2. So when is Hillary going to sacrifice Chelsea to the Army and her

war god?

Hillary is just another strumpet for the military-industrial complex.

[Freddie Stubbs]

11. I suppose when parents get the right to order their adult children

to enlist in the military.

[Larkspur]

14. I'm sure she could persuade Chelsea. Mothers often use the "guilt trip"

tactic. She could pressure Chelsea with serving in the Army as Chelsea's moral and civic duty and to help get her mother elected President. <sarcasm>What daughter would deny that to her mother? </sarcasm>

[Freddie Stubbs]

22. A strong-willed daughter would make up her own mind

[Larkspur]

23. So Chelsea is "unpatriotic" and is willing to let the poor fight, die, and

get maimed to support her lifestyle and her mother's political ambitions. What a morally bankrupt family they are!

[realFedUp]

3. I'm not happy that she's stated that she'll probably vote for Roberts

maybe she should do her homework first.

[Mass]

7. Where did she state that?

(except from Drudge).

If she did, she is clearly wrong (as are all those who already stated that), but I do not remember any other source than Drudge.

[realFedUp]

16. just read it on drudge via another site

Ok, so it's not fact yet...
Let's hear it from her.

[Dhalgren]

4. The birth of the "Who Cares" Democratic Party.

Come on, now, it is the "Who Cares" Democrats turn in the WH. Their Corporate masters want to be fair in doling out offices to their thralls. So, it is time for the Corporate "Who Cares" Democrats to be "in power" (ha, ha, it is so funny to say that). Grass roots? We don't need no stinkin' grass roots! You will vote for who we tell you to vote for - I mean, if you don't vote for the Corporate "Who Cares" Democrat, it will be just like voting for the Corporate Republican (actually, voting either way is pretty much the same, but don't tell anyone, he,he).

I guess I'll just have to vote Communist; I mean, anyone to the left of our "liberal" "Who Cares" Democrats is a commie anyway, right?

Sorry, I get so sick of Democrats holding the fascists' coats that I sometime forget that Democrats aren't Republicans because...well..its like a different party, you know?

[Armstead]

13. It is getting frustrating

The Democrats have access to a strong running stream of clear water available to fuel a real political resurgance, and yet they keep going back to the same polluted well of "Me too" corporate conservatism.

[Lerkfish]

5. that's not moderate, that's quisling-ate

why do they insist on calling republican values "moderate" or "centrist"?

they aren't. Theyre only slightly less fascist than neoconservativism.

for them to be TRULY moderate, they would have a balanced approach, instead of giving in completely to the RNC.

[Armstead]

6. "Let's lose again" is DLC strategy

It's eitehr funny or annoying that the DLC talks about the need for a bold new vision to counter the GOP, but offers the same old, same old warmed over three day oatmeal as a "vision."

IMO, some of these ideas are fine on their own terms, but skirt the fundamental and real issues facing average and poor Americans, and the basic fabric of the nation. There is no "there" there in the DLC vision.


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aV0...
Democratic Centrists Plot Path to Counter Republican Dominance
July 25 (Bloomberg)

-- Top national Democrats, including several of the party's likely 2008 presidential contenders, are returning to the well of ideas from the centrist group that helped fashion President Bill Clinton's agenda in the 1990s.

The Democratic Leadership Council's two-day session in Columbus, Ohio, which opened yesterday, features speeches by New York Senator Hillary Clinton, Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack, Indiana Senator Evan Bayh and Virginia Governor Mark Warner, all potential presidential nominees.

Titled ``Heartland Values, Bold Solutions: An American Reform Agenda,'' the gathering comes at a time when Democrats find themselves with political opportunities, mostly because of President George W. Bush's difficulties on Social Security, the economy and Iraq rather than greater public acceptance of Democratic ideas.

<CUT>


The DLC's blueprint for change, distributed in Columbus, includes proposals for:

-- Increasing the size of the U.S. military by 100,000 personnel and assuring the services can recruit on college campuses.

Taxes, Energy

-- Altering the tax code to provide a $3,000-a-year college tax credit, a universal home mortgage deduction for people who don't itemize their taxes, an expanded family tax credit for couples with children and a universal pension that replaces 16 existing IRA-style accounts with one portable retirement account.

-- Cutting oil imports by 25 percent by 2025 and converting government vehicles to the use of hybrid engines by 2010.

-- Reducing congressional and non-defense federal government staff by 10 percent, cutting government consultants by 150,000, slashing ``excessive'' highway spending 50 percent and bringing back limits on discretionary spending.

-- Enacting tax cuts that encourage investment and setting up a Corporate Subsidy Reform Commission that cuts $30 billion in business subsidies at year for the next decade.

-- Lowering health care costs by investing in technology and research to find cures for diseases such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's.

-- Adopting a uniform ratings system for ``entertainment media'' that market products to children.

-- Cracking down on government corruption by forbidding members of Congress and administration officials from becoming lobbyists when they leave office.

[Mass]

8. Is that really surprising.

She has been doing that for months now.

She is becoming a second Lieberman.

[quinnox]

9. Good for her

She needs to appeal to the center to get ready for a 2008 run

[Lerkfish]

10. once again, its NOT the "center", its the position of capitulation to RNC

that's not centrist. That's collaborative to fascists.

IMHO, of course.

[Armstead]

12. The center is not the right

This "center" crap is just that. Crap.

I'm probably right wing about gun control and certain otehr issues. I'm left wing on otehr issues. And i'm probably a "centrist" on still otehrs.

Most people are that way. This "centrism" crap is just pandering and capitulating to the agenda of Big Business and the Far right.

[woodleydem]

15. How dare Hillary try to appeal to any other groups except hardcore extreme

liberals!! Does she actually think that there are Democrats out there that may not buy into every aspect of the extreme liberal agenda? It's almost like she is someone who grew up in the midwest and lived in Arkansas for 17 years. I think it's pretty clear that any Democrat who is pro-military, speaks out about sex and violence on TV, and talks about terrorism is really a Republican fascist. It's sooo obvious!!!

:sarcasm:

[Armstead]

17. Horse merde

What is a hardcore extreme liberal anyway?

Someone who thinks that we should not be selling the government to Corporate America? Someone who believes that we should not be knocking the slats out from the American economy by supporting these ridiculous pro-corporate trade policies?

The Democrats get into trouble by the issues they AVOID.

[Dhalgren]

18. How close would Kerry have come to beating Bush if the Left had

not voted for him? How close will Hillary come to winning if the Left (extreme or otherwise) do not vote for her? Once it sinks into the the Left that the DLC brand of Democrat is not discernibly different from a Republican, the Left will go else where. But some people seem so addicted to losing with the DLC that no amount reason will shake them of their particular "monkey"...

[Armstead]

19. Exactly

The Republicans are smart enough to recognize that you start with your base and work outward. That's why they keep winning and we keep losing.

[woodleydem]

21. Did Bill Clinton have overwhelming support from the Left? I think not.

In fact, Hillary probably has more grassroots support from the base than Bill ever had. And what is with this "keep losing with the DLC" nonsense? Bill Clinton is a former chairman of the DLC and a two-term President!!!! Who is the liberal left's standard bearer? Where's your two-term, or even one-term President? The main reason why Kerry lost is because he didn't garner much support outside the liberal base. Clinton achieved overwhelming electoral college victories because of his appeal to independent, moderate voters. He was NEVER well-liked by the liberal left, but got just enough support from them to supplement his broad appeal to other groups. You people are dreaming if you think a Howard Dean-type liberal would ever even come close to winning a national election.

[Larkspur]

24. Clinton won in 1992 with less than 50% of the vote. Ross Perot helped

Bill Clinton win the White House by cutting into Bush I's voting pool.

In 1992, Clinton ran on an economic populist platform that if used today, Al From would denounce.

Bill Clinton is the only DLC candidate who won the White House, but it was not DLC views that won it for him. It was Clinton's political talent, Ross Perot and Clinton's economic populist platform, which he abandoned after reaching the White House.

[Dhalgren]

25. I'm not a Howard Dean person. Bill Clinton won his elections

because he is the most dynamic politician to come along in a generation and because of Ross Perot splitting the Republican vote.

But these are new and different times. These are not the "good old days" of the early and mid nineties. We are in the early stages of a fascist take-over. You can't defeat the fascists by saying "me too". It is really silly for people to disparage the left base of the party, it shows how out of touch with reality they really are. In order to defeat the Republicans, the Democratic Party will have to have its left base in full support. It is stupid to suggest otherwise...

[Armstead]

28. Bill Clintton ran as a liberal populist in 92

He came across as a liberal alternative, and a refreshing change after 12 years of the hard core Republicans and tight-butted Bush 1 that he didn't have to work very hard to reach both "moderates" and lefties.

Plus it was a three way race, and Clinton did not get a clear majority.

The game has changed since then. Time to use a new playbopok, or go back to Bill Clinton's original one.

[CWebster]

31. actually- and this is often overlooked

it was the contentious issue of abortion that swept the Clintons into the Whitehouse soon after a massive pro-choice march in Washington--of mostly women.

The irony is Clinton's sleazy behavior in the whitehouse actually damaged feminists credibility on issues of harassment, and now the Ms muddies the water on abortion rights.

[woodleydem]

34. Clinton did NOT run as a liberal populist, he ran as a "New Democrat", a

moniker that was developed dating back to his days at the DLC. The "New Democrat" platform was one of pro-business, fiscal responsibility, welfare reform, and free trade, none of those items being high up on a liberal platform. The whole idea of the "New Democrat" platform was to seperate Clinton from the liberal Democratic candidates of the 70's and 80's. NAFTA, the Welfare Reform Act of 1997, the Defense of Marriage Act--those were all hallmarks of the Clinton Presidency that were achieved without much, if any, liberal support. BTW, Perot's support had eroded dramatically in 1996, and Clinton still destroyed Dole. But I still haven't gotten a questioned answered that I posed in my original post: the DLC has a two-term President in Clinton, who is the liberal standard bearer? And I only ask because I read so many posts around here about how the DLC always "loses", but at least they can boast of Clinton. Who does the liberal wing have to boast about? It's a legitimate question.

[Larkspur]

37. Brian Schweitzer of Montana, Feingold of Wisconsin, Wellstone of MN

are a few I would think of. Barack Obama is another, though lately he sounds more DLC'ish than he did during his campaign.

Schweitzer and the Montana Dems spent 10 years rebuilding the Dem Party in a "Red" state and they DID NOT USE THE DLC handbook. Today, they are the model that Howard Dean is using to win back "Red" states for Dems.

Feingold of WI opposed the Iraq War, the Patriot Act, and Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy. The Repukes thought that they could easily defeat Feingold by claiming he was unpatriotic for not supporting an immoral war and an act that threaten our civil rights. To the DLC's chargrin, Feingold won re-election handily.

Wellstone won election through populist methods. He faced a tough re--election but he opposed the Iraq War and his political courage turn the tide on his re-election chances. Unfortunately, a plane crash killed a leading progressive voice and we'll never know for sure if he would have won re-election.

Up and coming progressives -- Phil Angelides of CA, who is running for Governor of CA. Eliot Spitzer of NY has been a thorn in the sides of corrupt corporate America.

I also like what David Sirota has written about -- Community Ownership http://www.workingforchange.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=4C9833FF-D9A4-FEC9-083A1EEA7E66AE70

[CWebster]

40. Clinton came to represent the party

and the DLC was the horse the Clinton's rode in on. They were perhaps, the reaction to the post Reagan years and an antidote for the mild vulnerability of Carter. clinton achieved his aims through charm and triangulation strategy but it really came at the expense of the party's future because it forgot what it means to be a Democrat.

[iconoclastNYC]

36. Perot siphoned off votes from BUSH!

I'm so sick of people forgetting history and giving DLC centrism the credit for Clinton's win. Look up the vote breakdown and ask yourself if Clinton would have won had it not been for the Perot factor.

[NativeTexan]

43. Exactly

George W. Bush is the FIRST president to win with an EXTREMIST base. But how they actually won was lying and cheating.

In 2000 it took a coup d' tat, to beat Al Gore.

When things swing back to the middle, we Democrats have our edge.

http://truthfromtheamericanmiddle.blogspot.com/

[CWebster]

45. Extremist---exactly

and the DLC jockeys the center from moderate Republican to extremist while putting their greatest effort into marginalizing the Democrats out of the Democratic party. That leaves a vast majority without representation, an unwillingness to pitch an alternative to voters, and a continuing monopolization of the levers of power and leadership.

What is wrong with this picture?

[Donna Zen]

41. Dare Who?

Being supportive of the troops means not sending them into some senseless elective war. Being supportive of children means not voting for a trojan horse like the NCLB Act. Being supportive of working families means being not supportive of cracked-brained ideas like NAFTA.

So how dare you insinuate that my support of an America that lives our ideals is somehow hardcore extremism.

Hillary's votes are not about the "common good" they are about what's good for Hillary.

Anyone wishing to reward the puppets of big bucks with their vote can go right ahead. But if we want to form that more perfect union, then we need to find people to vote for who vote for us.

[SaveElmer]

47. Amen brother...you just set yourself up for some flaming!!!

Didn't you get the memo...it's Hillary Clinton and the DLC that are the real enemy...not George Bush!!!

[Armstead]

20. Oh barf

A "national conversation" that will include everyone but the "far-left fringe" that the DLC hates so much.



http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=85&subid=108&contentid=253475

DLC | Press Release | July 25, 2005
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton Accepts Position as Chair of the DLC's 'American Dream Initiative'

For Immediate Release

Contact: Tammy Sun
[phone], [e-mail]

COLUMBUS, OHIO -- DLC Chair Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack announced today, Monday July 25th, that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) will Chair the American Dream Initiative, a special project of the Democratic Leadership Council. The announcement took place during the General Session of the DLC's National Conversation, an annual event that brings together Democratic leaders from across the nation to talk about innovative ideas and strategies for governing in their states and communities. This year, over 300 elected officials from 40 states were in attendance.

The American Dream Initiative is a year-long project of the DLC that will engage political, business, labor, civic and intellectual leaders in a "national conversation" to help shape a positive agenda for our country and the Democratic party. The Initiative will focus on challenges facing America including: keeping our country safe, building an opportunity society, standing up for families and making sure our political and electoral systems work for all Americans.

Gov. Vilsack said: "I have asked Sen. Clinton to chair a special project at the DLC called the American Dream Initiative. I'm very happy to announce that she has accepted, and I look forward to working together to shape a positive agenda for the country. Sen. Clinton's expertise on policy issues and deep understanding of the challenges we face as a party and as a nation make her an ideal person to lead this important effort."

Sen. Clinton said: "I am proud to take on the task of leading the American Dream Initiative for the DLC because its mission goes to the heart of why I am a Senator, and what I believe about public service -- that we are here to leave our children a richer, safer and stronger land than we inherited from our parents. I look forward to working with Gov. Vilsack and all interested Americans on this project."

[Desperadoe]

27. DLC offers a "Dream"

The repukes under Newk offered a "Contract". Which would you rather have?

Al and Hillary are dreaming if they think they will get my vote.

[Armstead]

29. The "dream" is that they will win elections this way

By ignoring and/or poking their thumbs in the eyes of liberals and the Democratic base.

[gulfcoastliberal]

26. "She has it" - DLC jargon for big corporate money

2006 report:

1 Citigroup Inc $103,700
2 Metropolitan Life $85,000
3 International Profit Assoc $80,000
4 Corning Inc $62,750
5 Cablevision Systems $53,500
6 Goldman Sachs $53,000
7 E*TRADE Financial Group $49,600
8 Monster Worldwide $36,500
9 Aetna Inc $35,000
10 Time Warner $34,350

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.asp?CID=N00000019&cycle=2006

2004 report:

1 Citigroup Inc $190,150
2 Goldman Sachs $137,170
3 Kushner Companies $119,000
4 Cablevision Systems $104,450
5 International Profit Assoc $86,000
6 Metropolitan Life Insurance $85,500
7 Walt Disney Co $84,850
8 Corning Inc $83,750
9 Time Warner $80,100
10 Skadden, Arps et al $71,600

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.asp?CID=N00000019&cycle=2004

[union_maid]

30. The Republican lite thing is so over

The country is desparate for solutions on healthcare. We need leadership in dealing with the global economy. Real leadership, not assurances that somehow or other we'll be find even if we have to compete against people making a fraction of what we need just to keep a roof over our heads and food on the table. We don't have a larger army because we're fighting a senseless war on false pretenses. We need leadership that will acknowledge the realities in an honest way. I'm so sick of all the bullshit.

If Hillary's the candidate, I'll vote for her. She'll be better than a Republican, but not nearly better enough. I will not vote for her in the primary no matter what.

[dolstein]

32. Hillary was always a moderate

Hillary and Bill have a lot more in common that their last name and Chelsea.

[yukie]

33. Has Hillary left the party?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/25/AR2005072500102_pf.html

Where is the Democratic Party going? If Dr. Dean represents the DNC, does Hillary's recently announced positions indicate she is leaving teh mainstream of the Party?

[IChing]

35. Clinton joined Gingrich and Frist for an insurance plan for health care.

In addition, Clinton joined with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich to push for health care legislation like a single system for medical billing that all insurers and providers would use to save time and money.

How to Heal Health Care
By Bill Frist and Hillary Clinton

At a time when much of our public discussion is riddled with disagreement, there is an emerging bipartisan consensus in one vitally important area: that the challenges facing U.S. health care require major, transformative change. Some steps are already underway. Recently the Department of Health and Human Services announced a 10-year plan to build a new health information infrastructure. And while there is no consensus yet on all the changes needed, we both agree that in a new system, innovations stimulated by information technology will improve care, lower costs, improve quality and empower consumers.

>>>>>snip http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30277-2004Aug24.html

[Larkspur]

38. David Sirota: How the DLC reinforces right-wing stereotypes

http://www.workingforchange.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=4F54E6A5-CCD0-528A-169D5141BC148AA4

I've written before about how some people who claim to speak for Democrats seem to take pleasure in reinforcing dishonest stereotypes about the Democratic Party. The Democratic Leadership Council is no different - just read the headline of this article. Their whole case is based on the idea that Democrats do not back the military, which is so wildly dishonest it's beyond just a normal lie: it is a knowing lie. Democrats have consistently backed the military where the Republicans have not. That is a hard fact.

But that doesn't fit the DLC's goals, which are to undermine the Democratic Party. Instead of working to debunk these right-wing stereotypes, these insulated Beltway snobs seem to only feel relevant if they reinforce the right-wing stereotypes parroted by Fox News and the Republican Party. It just shows that for Democrats who want to win - and not just preserve their status on the Washington cocktail party circuit - the DLC is really part of the problem, not the solution.

Let's be clear - the DLC has done masterfully in selling its snake oil by always claiming that Democrats need a coherent "positive" agenda. No one argues with that. The problem is that the DLC offers neither a coherent agenda, or anything positive.

[AntiCoup2K4]

39. Cut out the DLC cancer NOW

Save the party. Save the country. Fuck the neocon corporatist treason.

[Dhalgren]

42. I agree.

The DLC has got to go. If there is one thing seriously wrong with the Democratic Party, it is the DLC. The idea that real people in real life cannot decide for themselves what is best for them and the country is the DLC's main idea. They are the "Leadership Council" - what the fuck is that? It is a group of corporate thralls telling the real heart and soul of the Party that "we know best". They hate it when uppity, lower class, peasants presume to speak for themselves. Well, this peasant "ain't goin' to work on Maggie's farm no more"!

[T Town Jake]

44. Senator Clinton should be applauded for this...

...reaching out to the electable wing of the Democratic party is the first serious step back to power, as to opposed quixotic preening by "purists" who nitpick ten-thousand ways to nowhere - and end up slinging snot in the aftermath about "stolen elections," what-coulda-beens, and general misery.
Good for Senator Clinton.

[CWebster]

46. And despite the evidence, the buzzwords persist:

"electable"..."purists" and dismissal of stolen elections.

Why it sounds as if support for Ms Clinton comes with the rhetoric of the Right.